The shortlist for the 2016 British LGBT awards sparked outrage. Of the nominees for these awards, designed to “showcase individuals and organisations who have demonstrated an outstanding commitment to the LGBT community”, a large proportion are heterosexual, cisgender celebrities with little or no involvement in LGBT activism. The only mention of LGBT issues in the nomination of Zayn Malik reads: “In 2014, when asked about sexuality, he told his fans: ‘Just be yourself. If that’s who you are, that’s who you are and don’t be afraid to be the person that you are.’”. There is a separate category for “celebrity straight ally”, but “music artist”, “sports personality” and “global icon” also accept nominees who are not LGBT.
If these celebrities are so unconnected with grassroots LGBT activism, what drove the public and organisers to nominate them? Perhaps as well as critiquing the awards themselves, this situation should call us to question LGBT visibility in the UK as a whole. When the gay rights charity The Terrence Higgins Trust is in the news, it’s because Nigella Lawson is celebrated for supporting it. When transgender people are missing from our history textbooks, it’s understandable that people will celebrate Eddie Redmayne for bringing Lili Elbe into their lives.
Undoubtedly, there are many allies that can and have made a significant difference to LGBT people. When laws on equality are made, businesses change their attitudes, young LGBT people are inspired by an artist, it is likely to be an ally who’s responsible. In fact, what’s significant is that it’s incredibly likely, far more than proportionally. LGBT people are still less likely to get into positions of power and influence than their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts. In 2016 when the Equalities Act, same-sex marriage and diversity programmes are in place it’s tempting to think that we are moving into a post LGBT-phobic society where reserving space to prioritise LGBT people is no longer needed. Yet statistics on employment, income and discrimination tell a different tale, and UK law is still not protecting a large number of people who fall under the acronym LGBTQAI+.
Many LGBT people are seeing these awards as an opportunity to counter this imbalance that has not been taken. Comments on Twitter talk about how allies simply being “decent human beings” are put before LGBT people living through and fighting discrimination. With the running joke around the phrase “some of my best friends are gay”, followers were shocked to see vlogger Zoella’s nomination, which reads: “Zoella’s best friend, who she often video blogs with, is Tyler Oakley, a gay video blogger and LGBT advocate.”
It would be short-sighted to say that the only potential problem with the awards is the amount of non-LGBT celebrities nominated. That a category refers to allies as “straight” shows once again that T is the silent letter of the LGBT acronym – the fact that heterosexual transgender people are part of the movement is swept under the rug as unimportant. Among the LGBT people nominated, almost all are white, able bodied, middle class people in monogamous relationships and living what would generally be described as a “normal” lifestyle. If we are to criticise the awards we must recognise it as part of a wider system that promotes the assimilation of LGBT people rather than liberation, giving platforms only to those who are already popular and conforming enough. The problem is not that allies are inspiring and supporting LGBT people, the problem is how many LGBT people are not able to, and that those who do have so much less exposure. What are these awards for if not to change that?
I think part of the problem in your last point is that the T is quite different to L,G and B and has just been lumped in with the other 3. Perhaps because transgender people are also a marginalised group much like gay, lesbian and bisexual people, but by that logic you might as well lump BME into the acronym as well. All of these are important issues and equality must be fought for and maintained across all of them, but I do wonder if the problem of the T being the silent letter in the LGBT acronym (which I do agree with you on) is that it is quite different from the other three and has just been lumped with them for convenience when really it should be standalone. I understand why it wasn’t in the past but I think at the point we’re at now it might help transgender issues get more attention if they aren’t just lobbed in with gay, lesbian and bisexual issues.